Born To Slay 10,996 Posted July 6, 2016 Share Posted July 6, 2016 2 minutes ago, Didymus said: Commercial success alone should not qualify for being up there with the best albums of the year who are nominated for quality, not quantity That nomination was an unforgivable atrocity, point blank. The critics hated that album. It's like The Martian being nominated for Best Comedy at the Golden Globes.  But yeah, glad we agree it's rigged at least I personally liked the album, I thought it was well put together. And critics are not everything, some of them are snobby ****s that hate on things because they aren't serious enough. I'd say to get a nom, you have to one or the other. Critical or commercial success. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Didymus 33,978 Posted July 6, 2016 Share Posted July 6, 2016 2 minutes ago, Born To Slay said: I personally liked the album, I thought it was well put together. And critics are not everything, some of them are snobby ****s that hate on things because they aren't serious enough. I'd say to get a nom, you have to one or the other. Critical or commercial success. But then how are you gonna decide who's gonna win when there are both commercial and quality triumphs in the same category Teenage Dream won already for its commercial success: it was a commercial success. The end. I don't get how it needs to be awarded extra with a prestigious nomination just because it already achieved its financial purpose. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Born To Slay 10,996 Posted July 6, 2016 Share Posted July 6, 2016 2 minutes ago, Didymus said: But then how are you gonna decide who's gonna win when there are both commercial and quality triumphs in the same category Teenage Dream won already for its commercial success: it was a commercial success. The end. I don't get how it needs to be awarded extra with a prestigious nomination just because it already achieved its financial purpose. I'd say just have both things taken into account. Being entirely based critical reception isn't always fair because critics are often biased against certain artists. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Didymus 33,978 Posted July 6, 2016 Share Posted July 6, 2016 Just now, Born To Slay said: I'd say just have both things taken into account. Being entirely based critical reception isn't always fair because critics are often biased against certain artists. Well, then I'd rather just ban all award shows in general tbh Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Economy 46,157 Posted July 6, 2016 Share Posted July 6, 2016 23 minutes ago, Born To Slay said: Well in all fairness to Teenage Dream it was a record breaking album. I was referring to the songs that no one knew and were commercial failures. that said, I agree the Grammys are rigged. These award shows are biased toward certain artists. And Yeah, I'm sure Gaga would do that. And if Gaga does decide to perform her new single at the VMAs, it'd be a little more special if she were a nominee. Actually the grammys have high standards for how they score an album/song etc  But at the end of the day, the voters are individuals... And their preferences will always sway some of their votes...  As a result, big artists are more likely to be nominated and win Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Featured Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.